NCAA FB betting question

[pico]

Question 1:

if a home team is able to cover the -13 pts spread, the total (54) is more likely to be over or under?



Question 2:

if a home team is able to cover +9 pts spread, the total (44.5) is more likely to be over or under?


i know there is a slight correlation, but not sure what is it.

thanks

[Justin7]

Question 1:

if a home team is able to cover the -13 pts spread, the total (54) is more likely to be over or under?



Question 2:

if a home team is able to cover +9 pts spread, the total (44.5) is more likely to be over or under?


i know there is a slight correlation, but not sure what is it.

thanks

The correlations aren't strong enough in these examples to even cover the juice. That said...

If a favorite covers -13, a game is more likely to go over.
A dog covering +9 with a total of 44.5 is so minor, I'm not sure you can state a conclusion. If it were +19 and covered though, the game is more likely to go under.

[pico]

thanks.

when will the correlation be strong enough? say when the spread is greater than 1/3 of the total? for example spread is 21 and total is 60?

[pico]

ok, here is a better example.

florida cover -34.5 spread, the total (65.5) tend to go over or under?

[Justin7]

Covering -34.5, the game is more likely to go over.
At +34.5, it is more likely to go under.

The key is the ratio of the spread to total. On a game, if the total / spread >=2.3, you have a return on risk of at least 10% on any parlay paying 2.6:1.

So total of 46, spread 20 has a ratio of 2.3. That's good. Your example - 34.5, total of 65.5 - it has a ratio of less than 2, and is even better.

[pico]

thanks justin,

once again, you explainations are precise and easily to understand

[MonkeyF0cker]

Covering -34.5, the game is more likely to go over.
At +34.5, it is more likely to go under.

The key is the ratio of the spread to total. On a game, if the total / spread >=2.3, you have a return on risk of at least 10% on any parlay paying 2.6:1.

So total of 46, spread 20 has a ratio of 2.3. That's good. Your example - 34.5, total of 65.5 - it has a ratio of less than 2, and is even better.

Justin accidentally used the wrong symbol here in case that confused anyone. It should read total/spread <= 2.3. I'm sure it was just a typo since he explains it further below. FYI, some believe this number can be as high as 3 (33%) for profitability. But Justin's method is a safer route.

[pico]

Justin accidentally used the wrong symbol here in case that confused anyone. It should read total/spread <= 2.3. I'm sure it was just a typo since he explains it further below. FYI, some believe this number can be as high as 3 (33%) for profitability. But Justin's method is a safer route.

good catch. i found some ratios as low as 1.88, but books don't allow parlays on those

[LT Profits]

Justin,

I love you but I wish you would have PMed pico the answer.

[pico]

Justin,

I love you but I wish you would have PMed pico the answer.

yeah I agree

Hi, Mods, can you delete this thread.

thanks

[Justin7]

No books that will pay you take these bets and pay normal odds.

[rm18]

No books that will pay you take these bets and pay normal odds.

not true but i wont tell you

[rm18]

true odds no 2.6

[MonkeyF0cker]

Its not like it's a big secret LT. It has been posted in this and other forums previously...

[LT Profits]

And since it has been posted, some more books have stopped taking corelated parlays. SBR Forum has clout!

[Justin7]

The books that were taking it stopped yesterday... at least the ones on the recommended list

[LT Profits]

The books that were taking it stopped yesterday... at least the ones on the recommended list

SEE!